How is Wales any less a country than Scotland?
Unlike Scotland, Wales was never both independent and united. Before it was conquered by the English it consisted of a number of minor statelets. Afterwards, it was legally incorporated into England. It has never had its own legal system (one reason why the Welsh Assembly has no legislative powers - Wales is covered by English law). Wales didn’t even have a capital until 1955 when Cardiff was given the status of capital.
Apologies, my terminology was incorrect.
I should have said just as Wales
Actually, Wales did have its own separate legal system (at least on the civil side), with laws differing from the English in some respects (e.g., bastards could inherit equally with legitimate sons), until the Laws in Wales Acts (1535-42).
Update: Blair has announced he will resign within a year but will not name a specific date.
That’s helpful. :rolleyes:
Well-connected political reporters are saying that the entire Labour Party is in total disarray now. High-profile Brown-inspired resignations of junior ministers - one journalist described Gordon Brown as being like Osama bin Laden in his cave, sending out suicide squadrons - letters being written calling for Blair to go, Charles Clarke calling Brown “stupid”. Absolute mess, and will eventually cripple the country, as nobody will know which policies to commit to.
There’s only one thing for it; Boris Johnson for PM.
You really ought to put a smiley after that. Some people might take it seriously.
But of course i’m serious! In a time of political turmoil and confusion, only Boris has the political acumen and ability to hold everything together and bring order again.
(Oh, and 
)
I like Boris. If I lived a little further south he’d be my MP, and I think that would be fine - and I’ve never said that about a Tory before. Sadly to get him into power would involve the bunch of goons he’s allied with. And Blair Mark II would get there first…
Btw, he’s insulted Papua New Guineau now.
For the record, I like him as well. I don’t know of any other country that has, or could have, a politician like him. I’m not sure whether that’s a good thing or not.
What are the current feelings in Scotland toward Bush, Iraq and Israel.
Similar to England, although somewhat more so! Scotland stands somewhat to the left of England, and Enland stands considerably to the left of anywhere in the US (making the Socialist Republic of Massachusetts look like Texas by comparison. 
)
Bush disliked, not trusted, made the butt of jokes.
Iraq seen largely as a mistake brought about by Bush and Blair’s misperceptions.
Israel treated as any other democracy that chooses to cross the line between legitimate self defence and purposeful over-reaction.
Virtually no-one:
Believes there was a link between AQ and Iraq before the invasion.
Believes that there is not a civil war going on in Iraq.
Believes that Afghanistan is a minor policing problem but sees it as a major problem waiting to explode in our faces. (Memories of the last time the Afghans screwed the UK in the nineteenth century.)
Who on Earth" remembers "the last time the Afghans ‘screwed’ us in the 19th century 
Must be a lot of old people in Bonnie Scotland…really old!!
I assume you’ve conducted a poll on the “Virtually no- one”.
If not then you cannot make WAGs
Well there is the oft-quoted truism that no invader has ever held Afghanistan. Sure, you can invade, but eventually you get kicked out. And this, of course, goes back to the Night of the Long Knives and the rout of Kabul. I highly recommend The Great Game to read more about our ignoble history in the region.
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Well, having a dauphin waiting in the wings for the man who anointed him to make way is not a particularly Socialist way of doing things, and some of those who still think the Labour Party is socialist (or at least democratic) have always felt that it would be more appropriate to at least go through the motions of a debate, an evaluation of merits, a vote, and so on and so forth, rather than just letting Brown take the throne.
Plus which, the ‘Real Labour’ and ‘New Labour’ wings of the party have started to really think about the policy consequences of Blair leaving, and some of the more voter-focused members are starting to wonder whether Brown has the common touch and communication skills needed.
So all in all, Brown=Next Labour Leader is no longer an accepted fact but a subject of debate. Very heated debate, which the self-obsessed pressure-cooker of Westminster has turned into a frenzy of backstabbing and manouevring which overrides any practical considerations such as actually running the country, and which isn’t impressing any voters. It is quite reminiscent of the Tories just before the wheels really started to come off their wagon.
But if Labour goes the way of the Tories, who could possibly be next? Based on what I’ve gleaned from a lot of GD threads on Brit politics, the Tories still have little appeal and no constructive message. The LibDems remain locked in distant third place. Someone upthread mentioned a Conservative-LibDem coalition in a local government, but I just can’t see that working on a national level – the two parties’ values, viewpoints and goals are just too different.
You have to see it from the perspective of a parliamentary democracy rather than that of a presidentials system with a legislature.
If no party has overall control there are three options:
1/ A coalition between various parties on an agreed platform of government for a set or open amount of time.
2/ A minority administration by the largest party.
3/ New elections.
Of the three, new elections is the least favorite- ask a stupid question and you will get a stupid answer- people will not like being called back to the polls within weeks/months.
A minority administration would be in hock to the other parties and unable to govern effectively for much longer than a year- every vote might lead potentially to the fall of the government.
From the politician’s perspective, coalition looks the most likely to be popular with the electorate.
I can imagine a Tory/LibDem or Labour/LibDem coalition. The former would stress the Tory party by offending its Right Wing. Previously the second option might have offended the Labour party by offending its left wing, but with recent moves, it is more likely to be the Blairites who would be offended.
The cost would be electoral reform to ensure that the current system of over representation of the extremes ceased. If the LibDems play their cards right, they could be permanently in government, curtailing the rightward extreme of the Tory Party, the leftward extreme of the Labour Party and the anti-libertarian extremes of both major parties.
Keeping my fingers crossed.
Not so sure that is true anymore - the Tories have brushed up their act a bit, the European issue has faded in importance slightly since the EU constitution ran into the sand, and the old ‘stop pouring tax money down the plughole’ pitch is becoming a bit more attractive. At the moment it’s all up in the air though. A scandal on one side and a bit of discipline on the other could change the situation totally, and it’s a long time till election day.
Bit like in the US really - a couple of years ago who would have predicted the current situation?